linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] zcache: fix preemptable memory allocation in atomic context

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4FE86C1D.2020302@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:48:13 -0500
From:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] zcache: fix preemptable memory allocation in atomic
 context

On 06/22/2012 10:00 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 01:51:30PM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote:
>> I just noticed you sent this patchset to Andrew, but the
>> staging tree is maintained by Greg.  You're going to want to
>> send these patches to him.
>>
>> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> 
> After this series is redone, right?  As it is, this submission didn't
> look ok, so I'm hoping a second round is forthcoming...

Yes. That is the cleanest way since there are dependencies
among the patches.  You could pull 04-08 and be ok, but you
might just prefer a repost.

--
Seth

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/